Talk:King's Party
Cool Logo/page! Marcus Villanova Music is Life.Lean Forward.Walden 18:44, January 1, 2011 (UTC) :Thanks ;) 18:48, January 1, 2011 (UTC) Can't wait for the republican alternative...for some reason i feel like that'll be a nice page. Maybe that tub-of-lard Marc Thomassen should have been elected it could of been a preface to the IGP. Marcus Villanova Music is Life.Lean Forward.Walden 18:52, January 1, 2011 (UTC) Redo 2003-2007 I was thinking. This page irritates me. Especially since the monarchist party is non-conservative. Anyway, I think the PCP and other parties need to have a place in the pre-2008 space so we can get a better transition to 2008 (also, see my revisions to 2008 earlier today). —TimeMaster (talk • ) 19:38, May 16, 2015 (UTC) Just because it irritates you does not make it wrong. Monarchists can be non-conservative. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 19:57, May 16, 2015 (UTC) 0_0 Would you please respond to the rest of the question. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 19:58, May 16, 2015 (UTC) I think it would be reasonable for the King's Party to reform into the PCP. --Semyon 20:00, May 16, 2015 (UTC) Seems somewhat logical, maybe we should look at all the pre-2008 parties and consider what parties they would reform into? :O Hoffmann KunarianTALK 20:02, May 16, 2015 (UTC) Well, I am very much disappointed with the existence of this party, and the lack of significant movements other than regionalism, libertarianism, and republicanism in pre-2008 Congress. Please do not take issue with retconning, since Dimitri retconned this into existence. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 20:04, May 16, 2015 (UTC) @Kun: Most of them are obvious or even explicitly stated on the pages already. KP and F1 are the exceptions. Republicanism would be interesting to look at in more detail, particularly the distinction between right-wing and left-wing. @TM: indeed, but there's also a difference between retconning in and retconning out of existence. --Semyon 20:22, May 16, 2015 (UTC) Well, I really want to solve the problem of F1 and KP. I think Dimitri may have made F1 so previously powerful as a jab at rightism. Anyway, it doesn't really fit with the small amount of libertarians we have today. And I would really like to include some more parties. Where's the non-one issue parties besides KP and F1? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 20:30, May 16, 2015 (UTC) I don't see the issue personally. I agree there should be more/better continuity. --Semyon 20:36, May 16, 2015 (UTC) The issue is that KP exists and F1 is too powerful. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 20:40, May 16, 2015 (UTC) Solution: create continuity between KP and PCP; adjust F1 seat levels. I'm not very pro the latter though. --Semyon 21:05, May 16, 2015 (UTC) F1 is fine as it is. The party does collapse so I don't see a need to use even more retoractivity to firther weaken it. HORTON11: • 21:13, May 16, 2015 (UTC) F1 is fine, but a bit too powerful from 2003-2006. KP doesn't make sense to be monarchist, and while a continuity would be fine, I'd prefer to see PCP put in existence pre-2008. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:15, May 16, 2015 (UTC) I don't see F1 being powerful as an issue. KP is fine as it is; not all monarchist parties have to be conservative. Merging it into PCP is good enough. HORTON11: • 21:19, May 16, 2015 (UTC) But there also is no conservative party (or in fact, any real conservative party other than OC which is leftist, I think) that is monarchist. "Good enough" is not good enough. Indeed, they don't HAVE to be conservative, but it's unlikely. PCP and other parties like NSP need to have activities pre-2008. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:21, May 16, 2015 (UTC)